Subject: Catholic Church Teaching on the Eucharist - VERY LONG

Hi,

Please read what the Catholic church teaches about the Holy
Eucharist. This is very informative!

Peace to you,

Gene Climer


                     A CLOSER LOOK AT CHRIST'S CHURCH
                       Answering Common Objections
                          Eucharist, Holy Meal
                         Program 19 Transcripts
                               Scott Hahn


                               Introduction

        We're going to be focusing on the very center of the faith this
morning, and I feel so woefully inadequate because there is just so
much to say about the Blessed Sacrament. It's a sacrament and it's a
sacrifice in which Our Lord Jesus Christ not only establishes a
covenant, but really, is the covenant. And the sacrament contains our
Lord Jesus Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity; but it's also an
offering. So in the Eucharist Our Lord Jesus Christ body and blood,
soul and divinity is offered to the Father continually in an unbloody
manner. Then, finally, it's not just contained. It's not just offered
but it's received. All three of those elements are crucial to
understanding how the Eucharist is both a sacrifice and a sacrament.
And when it's received, we call that Holy Communion. All three of
those belong together. They are inseparable. They are critical.

        Now we've got to say one thing right off the bat. We are talking
about an unbloody sacrifice and we are talking about a sacrifice in
which Christ's death is represented. We are not talking about a bloody
sacrifice where Christ is still bleeding. We are not talking about the
fact that Christ is still dying on Calvary. He's not dying. He's been
buried. He's been raised. He's ascended. He's enthroned and there he
is in glory. But as he is in glory, he is the Lamb of God, enthroned
as the Pascal Lamb; and so all of this belongs together in a very deep
and mysterious way and I for one do not pretend to think that I can
encapsulate or summarize it all adequately.

        Now let's just also remind ourselves of another important
theological doctrine. God is omnipresent. God is present everywhere;
but Jesus Christ in His humanity, that is the flesh and the blood that
He assumed for Himself from the Blessed Virgin Mary, that is only in
heaven. That is spatially limited. In addition to its space, to its
place in heaven however, we also say that through the miracle of the
Mass and the Eucharist, Jesus Christ, not just in His divine nature,
which is present everywhere; but in His human nature is present on the
altars of the Church around the world as Mass is celebrated daily
approximately 300,000 times each day.

        So we are talking about the humanity of Jesus Christ which is
inseparably united to His divinity. This is done, of course, to
establish the New Covenant. Jesus Christ wants to be with us. His
name, in a sense, is Emmanuel, God with us. God is with us in such a
unique way with the New Covenant that we have to say it's a completely
different kind of covenant because in the Old Testament, the covenants
were all preparations.

        In a sense, the first time a covenant is mentioned explicitly is
with Noah and the covenant is that rainbow. So that covenant prepares
for Christ because we see that when the Lamb is enthroned in
Revelation 4 and 5, around his throne is that rainbow. Then the next
covenant is with Abraham and Isaac and that oath covenant is
established in Genesis 22 on Mount Moriah when Abraham was ready to
sacrifice his only beloved son, but God stopped him. That covenant was
not really completed until Jesus Christ, God the Father's only beloved
firstborn Son went to Moriah to a peak called Calvary and there He was
offered. And on it goes.

        When Moses led the people out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai and he
slew the animals and he took the blood and he threw it upon the people
and he said, "This is the blood of the covenant."  Those exact words
were taken by Jesus in the Upper Room when he instituted the
Eucharist, only to insert the word, "new" covenant, but it's there,
practically verbatim because what Moses was doing was only a symbol or
a shadow of what Christ would accomplish.

        Likewise when David, seeing in himself and then in his firstborn
son, Solomon, a priest king after the order of Melchizedek, there in
Salem, there in Jerusalem as he took the Ark up and as he requested
the building of the temple and as he gave the people bread and wine;
all of this was a shadowy anticipation of what Christ would
accomplish. But it was only a partial picture. So how can we possibly
exhaust the meaning and beauty of the sacrament? It's impossible, but
we can say this: God is not done in history until he is with us, until
he is one of us.

        For the first time in history, with the New Covenant, God is the
covenant in his human nature. The Christian religion is the only
religion established on the basis of  the divine oath. All religions
have divine oaths in this sense but we swear oaths to God, "So help me
God." "Curse me God, if I don't fulfill this promise." But only in the
Jewish scriptures and in the fulfillment of the Christian New Covenant
do we have God swearing the oath, pronouncing upon himself the curse,
and then establishing in his own body and blood, the covenant --
absolutely unique and distinct.

        Now, I could say many more things about that and some other
aspects catechetical, historical and so on. But I want to stop now and
let you know something that you may be aware of. I have spoken on the
Eucharist several times and I can see the tape supply on the table
dwindling. That suggests to me that several people here may have
already purchased these tapes. Now, I have given talks on the
Eucharist. One is entitled, "The Lamb's Supper." Another one is
entitled, "The Fourth Cup," and one is just basically a presentation
of the meaning of the Eucharist in the series that I did on the
sacraments.

        Now, I don't want to repeat myself because, you know, it just
wouldn't be kosher. Many of you are going to be listening to these
tapes. We're making a tape this morning and so I want to go on and
cover some new ground, but on the other hand it would be unfair of me
to assume too much because I doubt if anybody here has had a chance to
listen to any of those tapes just this week. So, I want to suggest a
plan for the rest of our time this morning.  What I would like to do
is rapidly summarize the main points of the talks that I gave,
especially the one entitled "The Fourth Cup," and then the one
entitled "The Lamb's Supper." And if  I had to give a title to this
one, I would entitle it "The Meal of Melchizedek."  All right, "The
Meal of Melchizedek," it's somewhat cryptic and illusive but I think
you will understand as we go on.

        Before I go on, I want to just read to you some quotations from
early Church Fathers about the Eucharist to give to you an awareness
that this is not some innovation.  This is not some novel invention in
the Middle Ages. For instance, there at the end of the 1st Century,
St. Ignatius of Antioch, disciple of the beloved disciple John, spoke
of the heretics who were plaguing the Church in his day. "They
abstained from the Eucharist because they do not confess that the
Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior, Jesus Christ." It's a perennial
problem, isn't it?

        Then St. Justin Martyr in the 2nd Century, one of the great
apologists, defenders of the faith, stated, "This food is known among
us as the Eucharist.  We do not receive these things as common bread
and common drink but as Jesus Christ, our Savior, being made flesh by
the word of God." Then in the 4th Century, St. Cyril of Jerusalem,
another venerable Church Father, wrote, "Since then he has declared
instead of the bread, 'This is my body,' who after that will venture
to doubt. And seeing that he has affirmed and said, 'This is my
blood,' who will raise a question and say it is not his blood?"

        So we have testimony throughout all of the first centuries of
the
Church to this effect. You are hard-pressed, I would say it is
practically impossible to find a single statement by anybody in the
first eight centuries of the Church where you have a denial of the
Real Presence of Jesus Christ, flesh and blood, body, soul and
divinity there in the Eucharist. I remember when I first discovered
that, I was still anti-Catholic, but boy, did that bother me; because
I wondered how could John's disciple get it so wrong? How could St.
Ignatius say something so patently false and superstitious after
spending all this time at the feet of the beloved disciple, St. John?
Now I'm convinced that he didn't get it wrong. Now I'm convinced that
Vatican II got it right when it said, "In the Sacrament of the
Eucharist, the unity of believers who formed one body in Christ is
both experienced and brought about." We are in a sense what we eat.
We're only in the supernatural body of Christ because in the Eucharist
we receive the supernatural body of Christ.

        Now before I go on and summarize those two talks, I would like
to
call your attention to something you've probably heard many, many
times. It's taken from the Eucharistic Prayer # 1, the Roman Canon.
First of all, just to kind of summarize the whole approach we've taken
all week long. "Father, accept this offering from your whole family."
In the middle of the Mass, we are told what we are and we are told
what we are doing and that is we are praising and loving and
sacrificing and worshipping our Father as he gathers his family.

        Then it goes on in the same prayer to speak about God. We say,
"Father, we celebrate the memory of Christ, your Son," etc. "Look with
favor on these offerings and accept them as once you accepted the gift
of your servant Abel who offered himself as an oblation." It was a
perfect sacrifice of his own body and blood in an act of martyrdom, a
very substantial image of Christ, but it was not perfect because it
wasn't voluntary. It was involuntary; it's murder. "The sacrifice of
Abraham, our father in faith who offered his only beloved son, on
Moriah." Another very powerful symbol of our Lord, Jesus Christ. But
then, he didn't really kill him, did he? So it's only an inadequate
image and the bread and wine offered by your priest Melchizedek.

        Now, that's taken from Genesis 14 where it says, "After his
return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings," the four kings
were with them. It goes on to talk about the king of Sodom went out to
meet him at the Valley of Shaven, that is the King's Valley, and
Melchizedek, king of Salem which we said in another setting, later is
called Jeru-salem, Psalm 76 shows us that, and "Melchizedek, the king
of Salem, brought out  bread and wine for he was priest of God Most
High and he blessed Abram." This is the first time in the Bible that
the word coen, the Hebrew for priest is used. He was the priest and he
brought out bread and wine and those two things are in close
conjunction. He brought out bread and wine and then it says he was a
priest.  Well, what's the connection?

        Back then the priest did not need to offer the bloody
sacrifices.
Those only became necessary, we learn in Exodus and Ezekial 20 when
Israel becomes enslaved and addicted to the gods of Egypt and to
idolatrous customs which God has got to break by having him sacrifice
the gods of Egypt ceremonially on Mount Sinai.  But back when we had
the patriarchal family religion rooted in nature, what was the
sacrifice that pleased God? Well, bread and wine offered by God's
priest Melchizedek, the first time that somebody is called a priest,
he is offering bread and wine to Abraham who has come and paid his
tithes and receives bread and wine and then he receives a blessing.

        Have you ever had that experience where you pay your tithes and
then you receive what appears to be bread and wine and then you
receive a blessing from a priest? This is the pattern of the
Eucharistic liturgy, where we give our offerings and then the priest,
Christ working through the human priest, transforms them into his own
body and blood and then he gives us that under the appearance of bread
and wine and then he gives us the blessing.


                        Summary of "The Fourth Cup"

        Now this is going to become very important as we unfold and
unpack
all of this. But before I go on with Melchizedek, let's just step back
and let me summarize these two talks that are on tape. The first talk
is "The Fourth Cup."  What I did in that talk I will just summarize
rapidly. I was investigating one of the last sayings of Jesus on the
cross when He says, "It is finished." I had a professor and a pastor
friend of mine ask the question from the pulpit, "What was Jesus
talking about when he said, 'It is finished?'" My first response was,
"Well, it's the work of redemption." Then he said from the pulpit,
"You might be tempted to say, 'the work of redemption.'" Well, I just
did, you know. And he said, "Well, actually, if you're going to do
careful exegesis and interpret the passage in context, there's no
suggestion of that big theological doctrine, there in the context of
that passage. So you have to ask yourself, 'What is the primary
meaning of the text in context. What is the "it" that is finished.'
And besides we can't just summarize and say, 'Well, redemption is
completely finished,' because Jesus hasn't been raised from the dead
yet. And St. Paul tells us that He was raised for our justification.
So redemption still has to unfold some more."

        "It is finished," boy, that bothered me. I remember going out
and
really resolving to do some work. So I did. I went back and I went, I
think five or six chapters backwards in John and I started reading the
Synoptic Gospels and I believe I found a connection with the Passover,
and I'll share it with you. Luke 22, verse 15, our Lord says, "I have
earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you." So we are assured
that the Last Supper in the Upper Room was a Passover meal. In Mark
14, verses 22 through 26, we hear the words of institution, "And as
they were eating He took bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to
them and said, 'Take, this is my body.' And He took a cup and when He
had given thanks, He gave it to them and they drank all of it and He
said to them, 'This is my blood of the New Covenant which is poured
out for many. Truly I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit
of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of
God.'"

        And I thought, "Huh, I never noticed those words before, 'I
shall
not drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new
in the kingdom of God.'" Elsewhere you have the same idea expressed in
the gospels where Jesus says, "I won't drink of the fruit of the vine
until," you know, I'm being glorified. And I thought, "Well, wait a
second, what he said, when he said, 'It is finished,' he had just
taken some sour wine." I wanted to work on that connection a little
more. And then I noticed the next phrase, "And when they had sung a
hymn, they went out into the night." They went to the Mount of Olives,
in fact.

        Now something disturbed me because I had been studying the
ancient
Jewish Passover liturgy for some time and I knew the four cups of the
Passover liturgy represent essentially the basic liturgical structure
of this meal. The first cup is called the kadush. It's the blessing
that is pronounced over the first cup. The second one actually
initiates the Passover liturgy in a technical way. The second cup of
wine is drunk after you do the singing of Psalm 113, which is known as
the Little Hillel Psalm and then the third cup, which is called the
cup of blessing is drunk after grace is given. This is also done in
conjunction with the prayer that is spoken over the bread. But what is
so significant about this is that after the third cup but before the
fourth and final cup, the Hillel Psalms are sung. It's one great
hallelujah Psalm. We get the word hallelujah from hillel which means
praise yah, yahweh, hallel-u-yah. And the Hillel Psalms 114 through
118 constitute a gorgeous and majestic Psalm of praise to Yahweh.

        As soon as the third cup is drunk, you go ahead and sing that
Psalm of the Hillel Psalms and then you proceed to the fourth cup of
consummation, which is the climax of the Passover. What's so odd and
what many scholars have noticed is that Jesus -- it says, "They sang a
hymn, which is obvious, the Hillel Psalm, there's really no disputing
that point. You know Jews who read this expect them to go on  to drink
the fourth cup. But it says, "They went out into the night." And right
after they drank that third cup and right before they sang that Psalm,
the Hillel Psalms, Jesus said, "I'm not going to drink of the fruit of
the vine again until the kingdom is come."

        Now there are actually some scholars who suggest that Jesus
botched it. Maybe He was just so anxious. But to botch the liturgy at
this point  would be a disaster. It would be like a priest saying High
Mass alongside the Pope and forgetting to say the words of
consecration. Sure, Jesus is anxious but the disciples would have
stopped Him. There would have been something else, I think. Well,
somebody could still say, "Well, you know, maybe He was just too
fearful."

        Well, I would suggest otherwise, and if we go on a little bit
further in the Gospel of Mark, I think we have a good reason to
believe that Jesus did this deliberately. He interrupted the Passover
liturgy right at its climactic moment. For what purpose? Well, in Mark
14, verse 32 , it goes on to read, "And they went to a place which was
called Gethsemani and He said to His disciples, 'Sit here while I
pray.' And He took with Him Peter, James and John and went up a little
farther. Greatly distressed and troubled, He said to them, 'My soul is
very sorrowful, even unto death. Remain here and watch.' And going a
little further He fell on the ground and He prayed that if it were
possible the hour might pass from Him. And what does He say? He said,
'Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee." (Remove this cup.)
"Remove this cup from me, yet not what I will, but what thou wilt.'"

        What cup? I thought He was scared about dying. Why does he refer
to his suffering and death as a "cup"? Hmm. Careful Jewish/Christian
readers would see a connection. Why hasn't He partaken of the fourth
cup? Why did He interrupt the holiest moment of the liturgy? Why does
He go out into the night after the Hillel Psalms are sung? Why does He
fall down on the ground and then ask the Lord to 'take this cup' away.
Well, somebody could say it's a reference to some prophecy Psalm of
Isaiah and Jeremiah  regarding the cup of suffering, and I think that
it does have a  secondary reference to those. But if we are following
closely the deliberate motions of our Lord, I think it's very
plausible to draw a connection between the interrupted Passover
liturgy and this anguished prayer of our Lord in the Garden.

        Now you know how it goes on from here. He's arrested. He's
beaten.
He's mocked. He's tried and then He's convicted and sent out to
Calvary. Remember when He was carrying his cross what happened? Mark
15, verse 23 says, "On the way up Calvary they offered Him wine
mingled with myrrh," which is like an opiate, a great and powerful
pain killer; but He didn't take it. After all He said, I won't drink
of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom comes." And it hasn't come
at that point, right?

        Then, all of a sudden, we go on and we discover something I
think
very, very significant. In John 19 we're told that Jesus seeing that
all was now finished, He said in order to fulfill the scripture,  "I
thirst." Now He's racked with pain. It's an agonizing death but He
still has presence of mind. In order to fulfill the scripture, He
says, "I thirst." Now do you think that man was not thirsty before
now? Seconds before His death, is He just noticing, "Boy, I could use
a drink?" No, I mean that would be to trivialize the matter. Jesus
says in order to fulfill the scripture, "I thirst."  John is depicting
all this in very beautiful terms.

        John (the Baptist) is the one who introduced Jesus as the Lamb
of
God in the first chapter, and now Jesus has become the High Priest,
the sacrifice as well as the victim-sacrifice. How do we know? Well,
for one thing, John records how Jesus had a linen garment that was
without seam. A seamless linen garment is exactly what the priest was
supposed to wear as he sacrificed the Passover lamb. And we also know
that the hour of sacrifice was the hour when the Passover lamb was
slain. We also read on in John 19 and we discover that the two thieves
had their legs broken, but Jesus didn't because he had already died,
thus to fulfill the scripture, "not a bone shall be broken." And  if
you trace it all the way back to the Old Testament origin of this,
"not a bone of his shall be broken," you go through the Psalms back to
Exodus and you discover that the Passover lamb's bones were not
allowed to be broken. If your lamb had a broken bone, you had to chuck
it and find another one.

        Priest and victim and it's all according to a divine plan. And
so
Jesus says in order to fulfill the scripture, "I thirst." And just by
coincidence, there's a little sour wine down there, a vinegar-like
substance and a man takes a hyssop branch, which incidentally and
coincidentally was what you use to sprinkle the lamb's blood over the
door post, he takes a hyssop branch with a sponge at the end with the
sour wine dipped in it and he lifts it up to Christ and Christ says,
"No, I'm not going to drink of the fruit of the vine?" No, he doesn't
say that. This time He receives it and He says, "It is finished."

        What is it? The Passover begun in the Upper Room. It is now
consummated. The fourth cup, the cup of God's wrath, the cup of
consummation wasn't drunk in the Upper Room. The reason why Jesus does
this, I believe, is to show us that the Passover sacrifice of the Lamb
of God, the firstborn son and the priest begins not at the foot of
Calvary but in the Upper Room when the Old Testament Passover begins
to be transformed by our Lord into the New Covenant Eucharist.

        You could also say it this way: that if the Passover isn't
finished until Calvary, I would suggest that Calvary is really begun
in the Upper Room with the Eucharist. When does Jesus' sacrifice
really begin? Well, He insists on the fact that His life is not being
taken away from Him. He is laying it down. Now in the trial, in the
passion, it's being taken away; but in the Upper Room, prior to all of
that, Jesus lays it down. He says, "This is my body. This cup is the
blood of the New Covenant."

        What happens when you differentiate and separate body and blood?
You signify death. When your body and your blood are separated, death
begins. That's obvious, I think. So Jesus is symbolically and actually
beginning the sacrifice. St. Augustine has said that Our Lord held
himself in his own hands and commenced the sacrifice of the New
Covenant Passover as He was transforming the old. Calvary really began
in the Old Testament Passover being celebrated in the Upper Room, when
the Eucharist was instituted and the Passover Eucharist of the New
Covenant really isn't over until Calvary, when He says, "It is
finished."

        But wait a second. You've got to say one more thing because way
back in Egypt, fifteen hundred years before, if you had slain a lamb
and sprinkled the blood according to Moses' command and say to
yourself, "Well, thereby my firstborn son will be saved," and you went
to bed, you'd be wrong, dead wrong.

        You'd wake up and he'd be dead. Why? Because one other thing had
to take place. You didn't just have to take a lamb without blemish
without broken bones, then sacrifice him and sprinkle his blood. You
had to eat the lamb. You HAD to eat the lamb. I mean, even if you hate
mutton, you had to eat the lamb.

        So, in a sense, "It is finished," what is the "it?" The bloody
death sacrifice. But is that all sacrifice is? Sometimes non-Catholics
find it easy to think that way until they go back into the Old
Testament, and as I went back into the Old Testament, it dawned on me
that that's really only the first half of the sacrifice. And it really
isn't even the goal or the end of the sacrifice. The second half of
the sacrifice is really what it's all about. God doesn't just want
dead bodies with drained blood. He wants peace and He wants love. He
wants to restore communion.

        How is that symbolically enacted in the Old Testament? By eating
the victim in a sacrificial meal, because that is what restores family
communion and that's what the covenant is all about. So Jesus says,
"It is finished." What is the "it?" The bloody death sacrifice of the
Passover victim and the priest of the New Covenant. And so, as
Catholics we have always said that He does not die again. He does not
continue to suffer. He does not continue to bleed. "It" is finished.
That whole dimension of sacrifice is finished. What began in the Upper
Room is now finished on the cross and so He gives up his breath and He
dies. He gives up his spirit and He dies. But  the sacrifice of
Passover is not complete until you eat the lamb.

        No wonder St. Paul says in 1st Corinthians 5, "Christ, our
Passover, has been sacrificed for us." Therefore, what? Therefore  we
don't have any more sacrificial offerings or ceremonies or feasts and
so on to celebrate because all those ceremonies are outdated and done
with? No. He says, "Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed;
therefore, let us keep the feast." And he goes on to talk about how we
take out the leaven of insincerity and we have this unleavened bread.
What's he talking about? Christ, our Passover has been sacrificed;
therefore, we've got to achieve the whole goal of that sacrifice, the
second half is communion where we eat the lamb.

        Now you can't eat a lamb cookie in Egypt. If you didn't like
lamb,
you couldn't have your wife make lamb bread, little biscuits in the
shape of a lamb and say, "God, you understand, we just can't stand the
stuff." No, you do that, your firstborn would die. You had to eat the
lamb. Jesus Christ has said to us, "My flesh is food indeed and my
blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has
everlasting life."

        Let's turn to John 6 and see the context in which he says that.
John 6, verse 4 tells us, "Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews was
at hand." So everything that transpires within John 6 is within the
context of the Passover. Jesus is talking to them now. At the time of
the Passover, after multiplying these loaves, ending up filling twelve
baskets with the fragments from the five barley loaves, He uses that
as his point of departure for one of the most important sermons that
He ever preaches and also one of the most disastrous from a human
perspective.

        He goes on talking about this bread and He goes on talking about
Moses in context with that bread. For instance, in verse 32, "Jesus
then said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you it was not Moses who
gave you the bread from heaven.  My Father gives you the true bread
from heaven, for the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven
and gives life to the world.' They said to him, 'Lord, give us this
bread always.'" Welfare state! "Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of
life. He who comes to me shall not hunger and he who believes in me
shall not thirst.'" And He goes on talking about this some more. The
Jews would then murmur at him in verse 41 because He said, "I am the
bread which came down from heaven."

        They're thinking, "What is He talking about? This guy is
Joseph's
son. How does He say, 'I've come down from heaven?'" They only look at
it from a human perspective. They don't see that He's the divine Son
of God. Verse 47, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has
eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in
the wilderness and they died. This is the bread which comes down from
heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread
which came down from heaven.'"

        How often did they eat the manna? Every day. How often do we
receive the Bread of Life? Every day. This is not a once for all
sacrifice, like many anti-Catholics allege in the sense that Christ is
sacrificed and now there's nothing more to be done. Jesus Christ is
sacrificed as priest and as victim, as lamb and as firstborn son and
as the Bread of Life, he gives himself to us as well as the unleavened
bread of the Passover meal, which commenced, of course, the whole
feast of unleavened bread the week after the Passover celebration.
Jesus Christ is the Bread of Life, the unleavened bread of God which
came down from heaven which the Israelites received every day, the
manna of the New Covenant.

        Christ through the Holy Spirit makes himself available as the
Lamb
of God to be consumed continuously. That's the whole point of the
Resurrection, incidentally. The Holy Spirit raises up that body and
glorifies it so supernaturally that body and blood which is glorified
may be internationally distributed through the elders and priests of
the Church so that all of God's children can be bound back to the
Father in the New Covenant sacrifice of Christ. He didn't die again.
He's not bleeding and he's not suffering. He's reigning in glory and
giving us his own flesh and blood.

        Where do you get that? From the Old Testament -- the manna, the
Passover, the sacrifice as it's described on Calvary as it's initiated
in the Upper Room and as he states right here in verse 51. "If anyone
eats of this bread, he will live forever and the bread which I shall
give for the life of the world is my flesh."  Jews stop, wait a
second. Hold the phone. "John, what do you mean 'my flesh?'" Verse 52,
"The Jews then disputed among themselves saying, 'How can this man
give us his flesh to eat?'" Cannibalism, paganism, barbarism, sin in
the highest degree.

        So Jesus said to them, "I didn't mean it, guys. I was just kind
of, you know, using hyperbole or metaphor." No. He actually
intensifies the scandal. He actually raises the obstacle even higher.
"He said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you unless you eat the flesh
of the son of man and drink his blood,'  which Leviticus condemns, the
drinking of blood, 'unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you
have no life in you. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has
eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is
food indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and
drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.'"

        He said that four times in four different ways. How else can you
get a point across? As a non-Catholic preacher, I used to enjoy
preaching from John 3 where Jesus says, "You must be born again," or
born anew, born from above. But he only says that one time. And we've
heard it a million times in the last century. Because all the non-
Catholic evangelists stress that rightly. We need to be reborn from
the Holy Spirit, but Jesus said it once. Here he says four times, "You
have to eat my flesh and drink my blood. My flesh is food indeed. My
blood is drink indeed."

        Four times. It bothered me that I had never preached a sermon on
this before, nor heard one. After years and years and years of hearing
sermons from the New Testament, I began to figure out why. Because
Jesus made it so clear. He is the manna. He is the sacrifice. He is
the priest. He is the victim. He is the firstborn son. He is the lamb.
He is all of it wrapped up in one and then He says so scandalously,
"Eat my flesh and drink my blood," knowing what offense they would
take. But He doesn't back off. In verse 60, "Many of His disciples
when they heard it said, 'This is a hard saying. Who can listen to
it?'" That is an understatement. "Jesus, however, knowing in Himself
that His disciples murmured at it," get it, the disciples, now, the
followers, the spiritual prot=E9g=E9s, not just the crowd now, the
disciples themselves are taking offense at this and murmuring and
grumbling! "And He said to them, 'Do you take offense at this? Then
what if you were to see the son of man ascending to where He was
before? It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh is of no avail.
The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.'"

        Well, some people try to use that verse to nullify everything
which is so patently obvious in the preceding verses. I used to as
well until I tried to deal as honestly and prayerfully as possible
with that passage. I'm talking about verse 63.  If the disciples had
just proceeded to take the flesh off the body of Christ right there
and drink His blood, they would have done nothing supernaturally
beneficial. Jesus is saying, "It's the Spirit that gives life," and so
wait until the Spirit is given. When I breath my spirit upon the
Cross. When the Spirit comes down at Pentecost, but especially when
the spirit of Christ raises the body of Christ from the dead, it will
be the Holy Spirit that makes Christ's flesh and blood holy, glorious
and powerful as food for our souls and bodies. Not just the flesh
alone.

        "And the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."
What words? That you've got to eat my flesh and drink my blood, those
words. So we can't just say, "Well, the words themselves are all we
need;" because if the words alone are all we take, we're disobeying
the words themselves. Did you catch that? I used to always say to
these Catholics in Bible studies, "Look at verse 63. It's the words of
Christ that give life." The words that I have spoken to you are spirit
and life. That's right, but what are those words? If you just simply
take the words without the Eucharist, you're disobeying the words
because the words say, "Eat my flesh and drink my blood." And it's
because of the Holy Spirit that we receive life in that flesh and now
it all comes together. There's no either/or; there's a both/and.

        In 63 we discover why Christ's flesh and blood will be so
powerful
and animating for supernatural life. Verse 66, "After this, many of
His disciples drew back...."  We get the impression that the vast
majority of them said, "This is just too much." "...and no longer went
about with him. And Jesus turned to the twelve;" he didn't apologize.
He didn't say, "Now that we're down to twelve, I'll tell you what I
really meant." He didn't say that at all. In fact he is perfectly
willing for this obstacle to remain scandalous even to the twelve. "Do
you also wish to go away. Simon Peter answered him, 'Lord, to whom
shall we go?'"  Almost implying we would leave if there was somebody
else that we could trust more than you because what you said is rather
baffling. But he says, "To whom shall we go? You have the words of
eternal life. And we have believed and have come to know that you are
the Holy One of God."

        Peter speaks of the truth for those true disciples because there
was one disciple who didn't have the integrity to leave. Next verse,
the devil came to Judas because Judas, unlike the honest disciples who
left, refused to leave although he disbelieved. This is where Judas
really becomes the son of perdition. In a sense you've got to give
more credit to the disciples who walked away.

        So we have reason to believe that this sacrifice of the New
Covenant Passover begun in the Upper Room and consummated on Calvary
and ultimately as 1st Corinthians 5 suggests continued and celebrated
as a climactic communion on the altars of the Church around the world
when we receive the Eucharist in Communion, all of this is right from
the Bible but you've got to know your Bible. You've got to know John.
You've got to know Matthew, Mark and Luke. You've got to know Exodus.
You've got to know the Psalms. You've got to know Corinthians and you
also have to know Revelation.


                    Summary of the Lamb's Supper

        Take a look at Revelation 5. In Revelation 5, there is a scroll
with seven seals that nobody can break open and everybody is really
upset. In fact John almost begins to cry. In 5, verse 2, "A strong
angel proclaimed with a loud voice, 'Who is worthy to open the scroll
and break its seals?' And no one in heaven and on earth or under the
earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it."  What is the
scroll? The word is biblion. Most likely it's a reference to a
covenant document, the New Covenant document that nobody is worthy to
break open. "And I wept much, but no one was found worthy to open the
scroll or to look into it," because this scroll would consummate and
fulfill the promises of the Old Testament.

        "Then one of the elders said to me, 'Weep not. Lo, the Lion of
the
tribe of Judah, the Root of David, he has conquered so that he can
open the scroll and seven seals.'" You could almost feel the
hallelujah rising up from within your soul. The Lion of the tribe of
Judah, growl for me, King, you know. You turn. You look and John turns
to look and what does he see in verse 6, " And between the throne and
the four living creatures and among the elders I saw," what? Azlam,
the lion? No. David crowned with glory? No. You'd think so, a lion and
a king are the words used to describe it. "I turned and I saw a lamb
standing, looking as though it had been slain."

        Jesus Christ is the son of David and the king of the new and
heavenly Jerusalem. He is the Lion of the tribe of Judah and He is the
Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world, as  it said
elsewhere in Revelation. But here in heaven on the throne of glory,
after His crucifixion, Hs resurrection, His ascension, His
enthronement, He still looks like a lamb. He still looks as though He
had been slain.  Why not clean up the body? Why not wipe away the
wounds? Why continue resembling a lamb? Because He's continuing the
Passover offerings, the sacrifice. Not by dying, not by bleeding and
not by suffering but by continuing to offer up Himself as the
firstborn and as the unblemished lamb, as the perpetual, timeless,
everlasting sacrifice of praise to the Father.

        And what do the people do? They rejoice and they break out into
a
song. And what is the song, "Worthy art thou to take the scroll and to
open its seals for thou was slain." Past tense, "And by thy blood
didst ransom men for God from every tribe and tongue and people and
nation." And what has he done? He's become a priest to be sure, but
for what purpose? "He has made them a kingdom and priest to our God."
He has made those whom he has saved priests. And what do priests do?
They offer sacrifice.

        Has Christ's sacrifice ended all sacrifices? No. Christ's
sacrifice has ended all ineffective, bloody animal sacrifices that
never did anything anyway. Now for the first time in history we can
really begin to offer sacrifice to God. Romans 12 says, "Offer your
bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God." And it
wouldn't be holy and acceptable except that it's united to Christ's
perpetual sacrifice. He's not bleeding. He's not dying. He's not
suffering, but he is offering a sacrifice as a lamb does, as a priest
king does continually, forever.

        And that's what it's all about. John wouldn't see a lamb looking
as though it had been slain if the whole kit and caboodle was
completed and done. Past tense. Yeah, it's completed and done, past
tense, and it's still going on present tense, and it's going to go on
forever in the future. Why? Because Jesus Christ is the same
yesterday, today and forever, as Hebrews tells us.

        Now, is this strange? Is this teaching novel? Well, let's take a
look at 1st Corinthians and see how natural it seems to the apostle
Paul. We have already looked at 1st Corinthians 5, "Christ, our
Passover," that's in verse 7, "Christ, our Paschal Lamb has been
sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival not with the old
leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread
of sincerity and truth."  What's he talking about? Is he talking about
leaven being like sin. No. He's saying let us celebrate the feast with
unleavened bread. What feast? The Eucharist! The sacrifice continues
because communion must be celebrated. We've got to eat the lamb, the
resurrected, glorified, enthroned lamb that still looks as though he'd
been slain because he's still giving himself to us.

        Turn over with me now to Corinthians, chapter 9, verse 13. He
says, "Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple
service get their food from the temple and those who serve at the
altar share in the sacrificial offerings in the same way the Lord
commanded. That those who proclaim the gospel should get their living
by the gospel." Now we might be tempted to read Corinthians 9, 13 and
14 and say, "Well, back in the Old Testament they did temple service
and altar service and sacrifice, but now in the New Testament they
only proclaim the word."

        The problem with that is that Paul goes on to say, Corinthians
11,
as we will see, how Christ's death is proclaimed. Take a look with me
at 1st Corinthians, 11:23-26. "For I received from the Lord what I
shall deliver to you." Interesting, he received it not from Peter  and
the apostles. When Jesus appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus or
perhaps at some other time, what did Jesus deliver to Paul?
Instructions for the Eucharist. "I received from the Lord what I also
deliver to you. That the Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when He was
betrayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks, He broke it and
said, 'This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of
me.' In the same way also the cup after supper saying, 'This cup is
the New Covenant in my blood. Do this." Commandment, imperative tense.
"As often as you drink it in remembrance of me. For as often as you
eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until
He comes."

        You proclaim the gospel. Let's go back then to Corinthians 9,
verse 14, "In the same way the Lord commanded that those who proclaim
the gospel should get their living by the gospel." How does Paul
proclaim the gospel? Just by preaching? Or by celebrating the
Eucharist? "As often as you do this, you proclaim the Lord's death
until He comes." That's the gospel. Paul is talking in verses 13 and
14 about how he should be supported as an apostle and he does so in
conjunction with temple service at an altar where there is sacrificial
offerings which he as an apostle has the right to receive from. What's
he talking about? A New Covenant temple? A New Covenant altar? A New
Covenant sacrifice where he proclaims the gospel by celebrating the
Eucharist.

        Now let's go on to Corinthians 10 and get things straight really
quickly here because Corinthians 10, gives us a proper warning. In the
first ten verses of Corinthians 10, Paul says that back in the Old
Testament with Moses, verse 3, "They all ate the same supernatural
food and all drank the same supernatural drink." The water from the
rock and the manna in the wilderness and both, Paul says in a sense,
were signs of Christ's presence among them. Nevertheless, verse 5,
"with most of them God was not pleased for they were overthrown in the
wilderness."

        In the next three verses he describes the Golden Calf incident
where thousands of them died. In other words just because you receive
supernatural food and drink doesn't mean you've got it made in the
shade. You have to set things right with God and keep things right
with the Lord. Verse 11, "Now these things happened to them as a
warning, but they were written down for our instruction upon whom the
end of the ages has come." We now have a greater and much more
supernatural food and drink. So we can relax? No. We've got to be even
more circumspect in searching out our hearts and making sure we are
right with God.

        He goes on in verse 16, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is
it
not a coenia, a communion, a participation in the blood of Christ?"
Not a symbol. But a share, a communion. The bread which we break , is
it not a coenia, a communion in the body of Christ. "Because there is
one bread, we who are many are one body for we all partake of the one
bread."  He doesn't mean to say that there's one enormous loaf that we
all take a piece from. There are many loaves of bread. There are many
breads in that earthly sense, but there's only one bread in the
heavenly sense, and that's Christ. Because we receive from one bread
Christ, the Bread of Life, we who are many become one body, namely,
the Body of Christ. He's suggesting that we become what we eat.

        He goes on to contrast our sacrifice with other sacrifices and
he
says, verse 18, "Consider the people of Israel. Are not those who eat
the sacrifices partners in the altar?" What he is saying is back then
when you eat the sacrifice, you have a communion in the altar of those
animals. Now we have a communion on all of our altars in the New
Covenant with Christ, the Lamb of God. Verse 21, "You cannot drink the
cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table
of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord with
jealousy? Are we stronger than he?" For some reason God takes this
with the utmost seriousness. Why?

        Corinthians 11, he spells it out even clearer. We've already
read
verses 23 through 26. Now we can conclude with verse 27 where he says,
"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord in
an unworthy manner will be guilty of the Body and the Blood of the
Lord."  Now that language is actually like civil judicial language.
Somebody who's practically guilty of murder or capital offense is
guilty of the body and blood. Now if it's only a symbol, he might be
guilty in some lesser sense, but when you profane the Lord's Supper,
you actually become guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the
Lord. "Let a man examine himself, therefore, and so eat of the bread
and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without
discerning," -- the symbolism? No. "...the body, eats and drinks
judgment upon himself."

        Now is he just speaking metaphorically? He couldn't be because
in
the next verse he says, "That is why many of you are weak and ill and
some have died." To receive the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin is
playing with fire of the worst sort. He goes on in chapter 12, verse
12, "For just as the body is one," the Church, that is, "...and has
many members and all the members of the body though many are one body,
so it is with Christ for by one Spirit we were all baptized in the one
body."  When we received the water of Baptism, we received the Spirit
of God. "And all were made to drink of the one Spirit." When we
receive Eucharist, Communion, we receive the Spirit as well as the
flesh and the blood and the body, soul, humanity and divinity of
Christ.

        This is significant, very significant. This, in fact, gives us
the
whole interpretive key to the Book of Revelation. We can't go into it
this morning. I go into it in the Lamb's Supper tape, but the fact is
many non-Catholic, as well as Catholic scholars have noticed that the
whole structure of Revelation is a big Passover liturgy where Christ,
the Priest King, the firstborn Son and the Lamb looking as though it's
been slain conducts and celebrates the heavenly liturgy. And the
earthly liturgy is meant to be a reflection in that, a participation
in that, and the early Church took it for granted. There is the Lamb
looking as though it's been slain and making all of the people in
heaven priests so they can assist in the offering of the firstborn son
of God to the Father and join themselves with it.


                         The Meal of Melchizedek

        But now I'd like to call your attention to our final phase and
that is the Book of Hebrews. Turn with me now to the Book of Hebrews.
Hebrews, chapter 6 describes how God had made a promise to Abraham and
then he changed the promise to an oath. In this morning's Mass we had
a reading from Ezekial where we saw that oath and covenant are
practically interchangeable terms. When God swears an oath to Abraham,
he makes a covenant. In Genesis 22:18, right after Abraham went to
Moriah to sacrifice his firstborn through Sarah, God prevented it and
then swore an oath saying, "Surely all the nations of the earth will
be blessed through your seed."

        The New Testament begins, "This is Jesus Christ, the seed of the
son of Abraham, the Son of David." Jesus Christ is the one in and
through whom God fulfills that oath he swore to Abraham. Where did he
swear it? On Moriah, where the temple was later built and where
Christ, the New Temple was later destroyed and rebuilt three days
afterwards. It talks about this oath and then it goes on to talk about
the priesthood of Melchizedek. In chapter 7, the first ten verses, it
describes how Abraham met Melchizedek. It talks about the meaning of
his name. He's the king of righteousness, that's what Melchizedek
means in Hebrew. He is the King of Salem, which means peace, shalom.
He is the priest of God Most High and he blessed Abraham, so he was
superior to Abraham. Everything is mentioned about the meeting between
Abraham and Melchizedek except one thing, the bread and the wine.

        Now we are going to ask a question. Is that because the bread
and
the wine was the only thing that was unimportant about Melchizedek and
Abraham meeting, or is it because the importance of the bread and the
wine is so great but so obvious that it goes without saying? Let's
study the next few chapters, just briefly look at those and see
whether or not you think that the writer understands Melchizedek's
priesthood in relationship to the bread and the wine that he gave
Abraham. I think it is. I think it's significant.

        For one thing we already saw back in Hebrews 5, verses 5 and 6
where God has sworn an oath to Jesus Christ. He says, "Thou art my
Son. Today have I begotten thee." And he also says in another place,
"Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." To be
God's Son is like the same thing as being a priest after the order of
Melchizedek. Remember way back in the Old Testament before the Golden
Calf, fathers were high priests and firstborn sons were priests under
their authority. This seemed to be the natural family pattern of
Melchizedek. This is how the ancient Jews as well as the ancient
Church Fathers understood it.

        Jesus Christ is not a Levite so Old Testament Jews might be
tempted to say, "Well, he can't be a priest, then." But Hebrews is
talking all about the wilderness generation under Moses and how they
committed idolatry and rebelled against God and how God sent all these
punishments. The first rebellion was the Golden Calf, and the first
punishment was to take the priesthood away from the firstborn, which
had been theirs for centuries, and to give it to the Levites
temporarily.  What the writer of Hebrews is suggesting is that Jesus
Christ, God's Son, is righteous enough to restore the original pattern
of the father-son family priesthood, because this is a divine family
that God, through Christ, is adopting us into through the sacrifice of
Christ.

        He is a priest after the order of Melchizedek. The word "order"
does not mean order like the Dominican Order. It means after the
manner of Melchizedek's priesthood. The writer goes on to make a big,
sharp contrast between the Levitical priests who continue to offer
these animals in sacrifice. They had to offer. They had to kill. They
had to sacrifice millions of sheep, millions of goats and millions of
cattle with millions of gallons of blood running down through the
temple. Why? It was all after and because of the Golden Calf, whereas
before all of that, you had a father and a son and a clean priesthood
that Melchizedek represents. "After the manner of Melchizedek"
suggests that Melchizedek's manner of priestly sacrifice was bread and
wine. This is how all the early Fathers understood this, as well.

        Now, it says in Hebrews 7 in verse 18, "On the one hand a former
commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness, for
the law made nothing perfect. On the other hand, a better hope is
introduced through which we draw near to God." And it was not without
an oath and it talks about how God swore this oath, and the oath that
has been talked about is the oath that was sworn by God on Moriah
where Christ was slain. Verse 22: This makes Jesus the surety of a
better covenant. The former priests were many in number because they
were prevented by death from continuing in office; whereas Jesus is
one.  There's the single priesthood, and he lives forever up in
heaven. But he holds his priesthood permanently because he continues a
priest forever. Consequently, he is able for all times to  save those
who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.

        "For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest,
holy,
blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the
heavens. He has no need like those high priests to offer sacrifices
daily." In other words to kill and to have blood shed continuously.
"...first for his own sins and then for those of the people. He did
this once for all when he offered up himself. Indeed, the law appoints
men in their weakness as high priests." That is the Levitical law that
was given after the Golden Calf, "...but the word of the oath which
came later than the law appoints a son who has been made perfect
forever."

        Now there's a lot here I realize we can't cover, and it's very
deep; but there's going to be enough here to really feed our souls if
we pay close attention. Now the point in what we are saying is this.
We have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the
throne of the Majesty in heaven. Notice that the Lamb is the one
enthroned in Revelation. The Lamb and the firstborn Son of the
Passover is the priest who ministers in a sanctuary, the heavenly
sanctuary. He is a minister in a sanctuary. It isn't complete. He is
ministering in the heavenly sanctuary and the true tabernacle which is
set up not by man but by the Lord. "For every high priest is appointed
to offer gifts and sacrifices. Hence it is necessary for this priest
to have something to offer."

        I read that a hundred times before the obvious meaning hit me
like
a brick in the face. He is a priest in heaven ministering now in the
sanctuary and he's got something to offer and he's continually
offering it. He's just not bleeding and dying and suffering any more.
He's not killing any more animals, but he's continually offering the
once and for all sacrifice which is himself; but it's a continual
sacrifice. It's a perpetual offering. He's not dying, but he's still
offering. That's exactly what the Catholic Church teaches about the
Mass.

        I didn't understand that. Then I read some basic catechisms and
I
understood it, but I still didn't believe it until I studied and
restudied and prayerfully re-restudied Hebrews until I saw that Jesus
Christ, the firstborn Son, which is the theme in the Book of Hebrews.
He's a much greater priest than the Levites. They  replaced the sinful
firstborn sons until the true and righteous firstborn Son of God would
come.

        Before we had an Old Covenant family on earth. Now we've got a
New
Covenant family in heaven, our divine family. The Trinity's life is
our family life and it comes to us through God's firstborn Son who was
like Melchizedek in being a son-priest. But the bread and the wine
that Christ offers is not earthly bread and wine but heavenly bread,
heavenly wine in the sense that it's the body and blood of Christ. He
is still to this day and forever a minister in the sanctuary and the
true tabernacle is now in heaven which the Lord has set up. And every
high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices and that is why
God appointed his own Son to be High Priest, to offer gifts and
sacrifices. And what are they? To offer himself and all of us in union
with him.

        The sacrifice isn't over. Oh, baby, it's just begun! And we're
going to be doing it forever in and through and with Christ. Not
bloody animal sacrifices but our hearts and our souls and our bodies
in union with the One whose body and blood, soul and divinity are
perfect and pure -- the only acceptable sacrifice which makes our
otherwise unacceptable sacrifices perfectly acceptable. "Holy and
righteous," Paul says. He goes on talking about the superiority of the
New Covenant that Christ established. Now that phrase, "New Covenant,"
is kind of an odd phrase. And this really is unfortunate because we've
heard the phrase New Covenant hundreds and thousands of times. So we
are insulated, almost like filters have been planted in our ears so we
don't hear the significance, the spectacular meaning of the phrase New
Covenant. Why? Because it's only said once in the entire Old
Testament, Jeremiah 31, which is what the writer of Hebrews in the
rest of chapter 8 quotes from, a huge, extended quote from Jeremiah
31. "The days will come says the Lord when I will establish a New
Covenant with the House of Israel." Verse 9, "Not like the covenant I
made with your fathers on the day when I took them by the hand  to
lead them out of the land of Egypt. That covenant, they broke." When?
At the Golden Calf. The covenant that he made with them out of Egypt
they broke at the Golden Calf.

        This New Covenant will not be like the Golden Calf in the Mosaic
covenant which was broken because they were the firstborn sons who
were supposed to be serving as priests and were. See for instance in
Exodus 24, but in Exodus 32 they all lost it and the Levites got it
because the Levites had swords by which they slew three thousand of
the idolaters, presumably many firstborn priests were among the
victims.

        It won't be like that covenant because this firstborn Son won't
break it, and that's what makes it new. "This is the covenant that I
will make  with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord. I
will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts and I
will be their God and they shall be my people." Verse 13, and in
speaking of the New Covenant he treats the first as obsolete and what
is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. Old
Testament only uses "New Covenant one time. Jesus in the gospels only
uses the phrase "New Covenant" one time. When? At Passover time.
Where? In the Upper Room. Why? To institute the Eucharist.

        Now, do you see a connection? In other words, the writer of
Hebrews has focused upon the key phrase, "New Covenant." He's made a
mountain out of a molehill, if you're judging by numerical usage: one
time in the Old Testament. Not how many, it's how significant it is.
Jesus only used the phrase, "New Covenant" one time, when he
transformed the Old Testament covenant of Moses, the Passover Covenant
by offering himself as the unblemished Lamb and the firstborn Son and
the Priest and the King and the Victim and all of it wrapped up in
one. That is the New Covenant.

        And so he goes on in Hebrews 9 to talk about the superiority.
Back
in the Old Testament, verse 9, we read, "According to this Old
Testament arrangement, gifts and sacrifices were offered which cannot
perfect the conscience of the worshipper. What is the contrast
implied? Back then sacrifices were offered  which couldn't perfect the
worshipper's conscience, implying that in the New  Covenant, what?
Sacrifices are offered which do perfect the conscience of the
worshipper.

        That's what the Eucharist does. It cleanses our soul. It wipes
away all venial sin. These Old Testament sacrifices, verse 10, deal
only with food and drink and various ablutions, baptismois, in the
Greek, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
Do you know when the real Reformation came? Not in 1517. The real
reformation came in the Upper Room when the Eucharist was instituted,
when the Catholic Church was formed. The time of reformation wiped
away the weak ineffective Old Testament sacrifices. To do away with
all sacrifices altogether? No. To initiate a new sacrifice which has
intrinsic power to cleanse our consciences.

        Verse 11, now, "The one Christ appeared as a High Priest of the
good things that have come. Then through the greater and more perfect
tabernacle, not made with human hands, that is not of this creation,
he entered once and for all into the holy place, that is heaven,
taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus
securing an eternal redemption." He took his own blood up there. He's
not bleeding in the sense that he's suffering and dying, but he's up
there as a Lamb looking as though he's been slain, offering his own
blood. That's a Eucharistic Passover sacrifice and that's why the
entire structure of Revelation is a Passover liturgy.

        And it goes on to talk about the Old Testament's weakness in
comparison with the New Testament's power. "For  if the sprinkling of
defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls or with the ashes of
a heifer sanctifies for the purification of the flesh, how much more
shall the blood of Christ who through  the Eternal Spirit offered
himself without blemish to God purify your conscience?" The body was
cleansed externally in the Old Testament sacrifices, but with Christ's
Passover sacrifice which he continues to administer up in the heavenly
sanctuary, our consciences are cleansed as we offer and receive that

down here below on earth.

        "Therefore," verse 15 says, "he is the mediator of a New
Covenant." He only said that word covenant one time. "This cup is the
blood of the New Covenant," when he instituted the Eucharist. That
fulfilled Jeremiah 31. That's when he offered what appeared to be
bread and wine. That's when he became a new Melchizedek, feeding the
new children of Abraham so that through Abraham's seed, Jesus, all the
nations of the world, all the families of the earth shall be blessed.
Something which God had sworn but had not performed until Christ, the
son of Abraham, was sacrificed on Moriah on the peak called Calvary.

        And he began it in the Upper Room when he instituted the
Eucharist
which goes on and on and on here on earth and in heaven above forever
and ever. He is the mediator of this new, everlasting covenant so that
those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance
which goes back to the promise that God gave to Abraham. Verse 24,
"For Christ has entered not into a sanctuary made with hands, a copy
of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence
of God on our behalf to offer himself repeatedly as the High Priest
enters the holy place yielding with blood not his own. He offers
Himself repeatedly not like the Old Testament priest who took in blood
that wasn't his own. He offers Himself repeatedly with His own blood
without any death and suffering, an unbloody sacrifice, but one that
belongs and pertains to the Lamb of God. For then He would have had to
suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world, but as it is, He
appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the
sacrifice of Himself.

        So what do we conclude from this? He's abolished the Old
Testament
and he's established the New Testament. We have a sacrifice in heaven
that is perpetual and effectual. Turn with me now to Hebrews 10 and
here is where we will draw our conclusions. Verse 19, "Therefore,
brethren, since we have confidence to enter into the sanctuary by the
blood of Jesus..." It's because of that Eucharist and because of
Christ the High Priest offering Himself that I've got confidence to
draw near to the presence of God. That's how John could do it. That's
why the scroll's seals could be broken open.

        We have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus,
by the new and living language He opened for us through the curtain,
that is, through His flesh, His flesh and blood. When were they
offered? His body and blood were offered when He instituted the New
Covenant in the Upper Room. "And since we have a great High Priest
over the family of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full
assurance of faith with our hearts sprinkled clean, a reference to
Baptism, from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure
water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering
for he who promised is faithful, and let us consider how to stir up
one another in love and good works." Amen! Let's do it.

        If Jesus Christ who is our master creator gave Himself up for
us,
we have got to learn how to treat other people as though they are more
important than we are. Let's figure out new ways to stir each other up
to love and good works. The Bible study that starts this fall -- get
involved in it and encourage  others to feed upon the Bread of Life,
the holy Word of God. Think of other ways, too, that you can serve and
love in this community to show people we really are the Body of
Christ. Let's stir each other up, but not provoking anger, but
provoking love and good works. Not neglecting to meet together as has
become the habit of some, but encouraging one another all the more as
you see the day draw near.

        Verse 26 is often misunderstood, "For if we sin deliberately
after
receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a
sacrifice for sins but only a fearful prospect of judgment and a fury
of fire which will consume the adversaries." What's he mean? Does he
mean in some generic sense that if you guys deliberately sin, there's
no longer a sacrifice for you? You're dead. You're going to be burned
alive.  If we interpret it in the general sense, I'm afraid that's
what it means. But let's not interpret it out of context. What is the
sin he's deliberately referring to? Well, what's the preceding verse?
"Don't neglect to meet together as has become the habit of some."

        The Lord's day, from the earliest times, was the regular meeting
for the people of God. Even the Romans tell us that early on Sunday
morning they would get together. They would sing hymns  worshipping
Christ as God. And then we are told that they would take an oath. The
Latin word is sacramentum. They would take an oath sacrament and swear
not to sin. All right. What does it mean? It means if we sin
deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth -- what truth?
-- the truth of Christ's sacrifice which is represented in the
Eucharist on Sunday.

        People who don't meet together on the Lord's day are repudiating
the only sacrifice that will work for their sins. The sinning
deliberately refers to deliberately sinning by not going to Mass. We
don't know anybody who has committed that sin, do we? All American
Catholics go to Mass every week. It hasn't become the habit of some
Catholics not to go to the Eucharist, has it? God help us if we don't
attend weekly liturgy as has become the habit of some. We're sinning
against the most beautiful laws that God has delivered to humanity,
that there is a once and for all powerful sacrifice, God be praised!
And we renew that sacrifice every time we draw near to the Eucharistic
banquet.

        It goes on, verse 29, "How much worse punishment do you think
will
be deserved by the men who spurn the Son of God?" Notice, "They
profane the blood of the covenant." Now that phrase is only used by
Jesus once when he instituted the Eucharist of the New Covenant. "This
cup is the blood of the New Covenant." And you profane the blood of
the covenant when you neglect the Eucharist, when you miss Mass, when
you say, "It's not that important. I've got better things to do."

        We've got to go there. We've got to be there, but we've got to
prepare to be there and we've got to be there with hearts and minds,
with soul and body. We've got to be there with the help of the Holy
Spirit. We've got to offer up ourselves in union with Christ because
we are members of his mystical body and that body is what's being
sacrificed continually. If we don't, we profane the blood of the
covenant by which we've been sanctified and outrage the Spirit of
grace, but if we do, what will happen?

        Turn with me to Hebrews 13, verse 9, "Don't be led away by
diverse
and strange teachings for it is well that the heart be strengthened by
grace, not merely by foods, like the Old Testament elders which have
not benefited their adherence." Verse 10, "We have an altar." If
there's no sacrifice, there's no need for an altar. We have an altar;
therefore, we have a sacrifice, Christ Himself. "We have an altar from
which those who serve the sanctuary," the tent, the Old Testament
priests -- " have no right to eat for the bodies of those animals,
those whose blood is brought in the sanctuary by the high priest as a
sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp." It goes on to talk
about how Jesus left the camp and suffered.

        So we should, too. Verse 14, "For here we have no lasting city."
The earthly Jerusalem is not our city, the heavenly Jerusalem is. And
it goes on. "Through Him, then, let us continually offer up a
sacrifice of praise to God." We still sacrifice; "that is the fruit of
lips that acknowledge His name." "Now may the God of peace," verse 20,
"who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of
the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant equip you with
everything good that you may do His will, working in you that which is
pleasing in His sight." It is the blood of the covenant that we
receive in the Eucharist with souls made right with God by which we
are enabled to do His will, by which God works in us that which is
pleasing in His sight.


                               Conclusion

        The meal of Melchizedek is the bread and the wine, but it's so
much more. We go beyond the appearances of bread and wine to the
reality of the Son of God and His body and His blood and the soul and
divinity. By that one sacrifice we've got confidence. By that one
sacrifice we've got forgiveness and by that one sacrifice we've got
power to do the will of God.

        Let's ask the Lord to renew for us our devotion to the Blessed
Sacrament, the Holy Eucharist. In the name of the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit we pray. Father in heaven, we ask that you would renew
that devotion, increase our understanding, magnify our zeal and give
to us, O Lord, a spirit of constancy so that we will not neglect the
Mass, the sacrifice of the New Covenant. We will not outrage the
spirit of grace nor profane the blood of the covenant. We will
appreciate and correspond to and cooperate with all that you have done
and given to us to grow up as your sons and daughters. Your New
Covenant family, O Lord, is the most treasured possession in the
cosmos and we cling fast to it now and ask that you would hold fast to
us and never let us go and hear us as we pray: Our Father, who art in
heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come; thy will be done on
earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive
us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us and
lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. In the name of
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you very much.


   -------------------------------------------------------------------
   The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.
   Copyright (c) Trinity Communications 1994.
   Provided courtesy of:

        The Catholic Resource Network
        Trinity Communications
        PO Box 3610
        Manassas, VA 22110
        Voice: 703-791-2576
        Fax: 703-791-4250
        Data: 703-791-4336

   The Catholic Resource Network is a Catholic online information and
   service system. To browse CRNET or join, set your modem to 8 data
   bits, 1 stop bit and no parity, and call 1-703-791-4336.
   -------------------------------------------------------------------